<p>The overall purpose of this essay is to study in which degree the democratic model that is called participant democracy works in the Swedish municipalities. To achieve what I set out to do I will focus on a central political area in which the Swedish municipalities has sovereignty versus the state, in other words in an area where they rule themselves. That political area will then represent how well the participant democracy works in the Swedish municipalities. The research questions then becomes:</p><p>Does the participant democracy at Swedish Municipality level work in a satisfying way?</p><p>Does the participant democracy in a large Swedish Municipality in a central political area work?</p><p>Does the participant democracy in a small Swedish Municipality in a central political area work?</p><p>Are there similarities and differences between the municipalities?</p><p>If so, how can that be explained?</p><p>To answer these questions I will study documents regarding the planning and building area. The Swedish municipality has an obligation through the law to provide a document that is a strategic plan for how the building in the municipality will take place. This document is called in Swedish “översiktsplan”. The second document in the essay consists of the alterations to the first document after the citizens and other have had there say. In Swedish: “samrådsredogörelse”. These two documents will give me a view over what the municipality was planning and then compare it too the changes, if there were any, after the citizens and others have said their opinion.</p><p>The outcome of the essay was that the participant democracy worked in both a large and small Swedish municipality and therefore the conclusion is that the participant democracy at Swedish municipality level works in a satisfying way. Although the participant democracy is working there is a problem with one of its components. The meaningful participant part has shown itself lacking in these two Swedish community’s as a result of that it is more common for either the political parties or the business world then the common citizen to get there opinion through.</p><p>The last research question was regarding the similarities and differences between the two municipalities. The similarities that exist are by my opinion based on the will of the rulers in the municipalities, they want to engage the citizens and they want for them to have a opportunity to get involved in the municipalities development. The differences however is in the way they want to achieve it.</p>

The overall purpose of this essay is to study in which degree the democratic model that is called participant democracy works in the Swedish municipalities. To achieve what I set out to do I will focus on a central political area in which the Swedish municipalities has sovereignty versus the state, in other words in an area where they rule themselves. That political area will then represent how well the participant democracy works in the Swedish municipalities. The research questions then becomes: Does the participant democracy at Swedish Municipality level work in a satisfying way? Does the participant democracy in a large Swedish Municipality in a central political area work? Does the participant democracy in a small Swedish Municipality in a central political area work? Are there similarities and differences between the municipalities? If so, how can that be explained? To answer these questions I will study documents regarding the planning and building area. The Swedish municipality has an obligation through the law to provide a document that is a strategic plan for how the building in the municipality will take place. This document is called in Swedish “översiktsplan”. The second document in the essay consists of the alterations to the first document after the citizens and other have had there say. In Swedish: “samrådsredogörelse”. These two documents will give me a view over what the municipality was planning and then compare it too the changes, if there were any, after the citizens and others have said their opinion. The outcome of the essay was that the participant democracy worked in both a large and small Swedish municipality and therefore the conclusion is that the participant democracy at Swedish municipality level works in a satisfying way. Although the participant democracy is working there is a problem with one of its components. The meaningful participant part has shown itself lacking in these two Swedish community’s as a result of that it is more common for either the political parties or the business world then the common citizen to get there opinion through. The last research question was regarding the similarities and differences between the two municipalities. The similarities that exist are by my opinion based on the will of the rulers in the municipalities, they want to engage the citizens and they want for them to have a opportunity to get involved in the municipalities development. The differences however is in the way they want to achieve it.